from the hmmm dept

We've certainly voiced our concerns over the US government's growing involvement in copyright infringement lawsuits that really should be civil matters between copyright holders and those they accuse of infringement. However, with our government often believing just about anything Hollywood tells them, and with a long term effort by the industry to have the government act as its own private police force, we're seeing things like the totally botched seizure of domain names of blogs and forums on a questionable basis. It seems that the US is not the only country with this sort of problem. Earlier this year, we noted that a court in the Netherlands was questioning why it appeared that Dutch law enforcement had totally outsourced its investigations to the industry "anti-piracy" group BREIN (who, we had noted, in the past somehow ended up keeping evidence) that should not be allowed to be done by private parties.

Well, in that case, against an indexing site called ShareConnector, the court has dismissed the case over the "faulty evidence," specifically having to do with law enforcement relying way too much on industry sources, rather than doing the real investigation themselves. This follows on an earlier criminal case where the operator of ShareConnector had all charges dismissed as well.

Once again, all this highlights is how these issues are not as clear cut as the industry and its supporters often make out. It's getting rather silly how often we hear people insist that this or that service or software are "obviously" infringing on copyrights -- and no case should even be heard before they're shut down/seized/thrown in jail/fined whatever. Copyright is not a black or white situation -- there's an awful lot of gray and it should be determined in a court of law, rather than just on the say so of certain industries who benefit from shutting down alternative means of distribution that interfere with their ability to be a gatekeeper.